We have reduced support for legacy browsers.

What does this mean for me? You will always be able to play your favorite games on Kongregate. However, certain site features may suddenly stop working and leave you with a severely degraded experience.

What should I do? We strongly urge all our users to upgrade to modern browsers for a better experience and improved security.

Kongregate is a community-driven browser games portal with an open platform for all web games.
Get your games in front of thousands of users while monetizing through ads and virtual goods.
Learn more »

Liberal Race Baiting

I’m so sick of this. Day in and day out I hear people being called racist for their opposition to liberal policies. The latest is MSNBC’s Richard Wolffe calling McCain racist for opposing Susan Rice’s potential nomination to Sec of State. McCain made it clear that his problem with Rice was her promotion of the Bengazi terror attack as a spontaneous event linked with a youtube video, when it was clearly not, even as the government of Egypt said it was terrorism. Similarly, the tea party was called racist for its opposition to Obamacare. When will the race baiting end, and more importantly, when will the electorate stop falling for it?
Sources:
[http://www.nationalreview.com/media-blog/333747/racism-watch-msnbcs-richard-wolffe-calls-mccain-bigot-greg-pollowitz](http://www.nationalreview.com/media-blog/333747/racism-watch-msnbcs-richard-wolffe-calls-mccain-bigot-greg-pollowitz)
[http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/20/msnbc-vice-president-racism-motivating-conservative-attacks-against-susan-rice-eric-holder/](http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/20/msnbc-vice-president-racism-motivating-conservative-attacks-against-susan-rice-eric-holder/)
[http://www.infowars.com/corporate-media-calls-obamacare-opponents-racist-homophobic/](http://www.infowars.com/corporate-media-calls-obamacare-opponents-racist-homophobic/)
[http://www.nationalreview.com/media-blog/309239/calling-it-obamacare-racist-greg-pollowitz](http://www.nationalreview.com/media-blog/309239/calling-it-obamacare-racist-greg-pollowitz)

> *Originally posted by **[Twilight\_Ninja](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6574902):***Both sides seem to do it (shrug)
I think this is a cop out. Liberals have SLAMMED conservatives for so called “racism” for a long time now, on matters, like this Susan Rice thing, which have nothing to do with race. I’m sure there are conservatives who race bait, but the sides are hardly balanced on this issue. Even on this board, there is race baiting by the libs. Karma directly said the other day, on the healthcare thread, that I oppose it because I hate poor people, and I’m “not allowed” to hate blacks and gays anymore. This is the mount Everest of strawmen, and it’s so obvious, and so silly. How can people buy this crap? I know I’m not racist, and I’m sick of being called racist. I’m sick of it.

> *Originally posted by **[MyTie](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6575040):***
> > *Originally posted by **[Twilight\_Ninja](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6574902):***Both sides seem to do it (shrug)
>
> I think this is a cop out. Liberals have SLAMMED conservatives for so called “racism” for a long time now, on matters, like this Susan Rice thing, which have nothing to do with race. I’m sure there are conservatives who race bait, but the sides are hardly balanced on this issue.
You know what’s gonna piss you off even more?
Chris Matthews.
His videos are absolutely ridiculous lol.

No, not so much a cop out, just an observation that I absolutely see both sides doing it. There’s what you posted—people calling “racist” over something clearly not racist like disagreement with Obamacare. There’s also a lot of “you damn libs” going around—both on forums and in real life—whenever they feel someone disagrees with them. I don’t know how else to really say it, except to qualify that people on both sides act like petty, partisan shits when they feel like it.

> *Originally posted by **[Twilight\_Ninja](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6575051):***
>
> No, not so much a cop out, just an observation that I absolutely see both sides doing it. There’s what you posted—people calling “racist” over something clearly not racist like disagreement with Obamacare. There’s also a lot of “you damn libs” going around—both on forums and in real life—whenever they feel someone disagrees with them. I don’t know how else to really say it, except to qualify that people on both sides act like petty, partisan shits when they feel like it.
Of course people act petty and partisan, but that’s not what this thread is about. This thread is not only about these people who act petty and partisan, but go beyond that, to something much more sinister. This is about people who slander and smear anyone they disagree with. This is ad hominem on the national scale. It is perpetuated by the liberal media, and by liberal talking heads, who just repeat the same points over and over. This isn’t just my side vs your side. This is my side vs your racist side, which is a parody of what you are talking about. This is a caricature of what the real issues are, to the point of being ridiculous. This is comical, in its over the top inaccurate and hateful slander. The really scary thing is, people buy it. And no, it isn’t done by both sides to this degree. There may be an isolated case or two of some idiot redneck being racist, but this is a major news outlet we are talking about, and this isn’t the first time, nor the first outlet. This is national level, my friend, not just idiots arguing.

You might want to take notes on the whole ‘damn libs’ thing that twilight mentioned. It’s a tiresome and altogether terrible way to start, defend, or end an argument. I don’t see a whole hell of a lot of difference between that and calling people racists, it’s still labelling the fuck out of people without any real justification.
I mean this thread is a perfect example. You hate liberals, we all know it, because you shit on them constantly, far more than the liberal-conservative dynamic necessitates. So OF COURSE you don’t think conservatives are complicit in this, because you’re a conservative, and far be it for you to examine your ideology for weaknesses. You and karma really are peas in a pod. He’s the liberal racist-mongerer demon for you, and you’re the conservative trumpeter for him. And both positions are wilfully blind.
There IS a problem, I agree, and a lot of it DOES come from liberals. But I have no interest giving you any ammunition to throw at them because that it’s all it is to you – ideological ammo.

It’s not ammunition to fight with. Who do I have to fight? I find no trophy for besting any of you.
It’s really just a problem I saw, that tends be more endemic to one side of the political spectrum. It isn’t that I’m trying to invent or instigate the spectrum. Look at voting patterns. This country is divided, and largely, between these two ideologies.

> *Originally posted by **[Twilight\_Ninja](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6575051):***
>
> I don’t know how else to really say it, except to qualify that people on both sides act like petty, partisan shits when they feel like it.
Agreed. If we can force ourselves to look past whatever ideology we think the person might have, and actually address their argument, things go a whole lot better.
The most pervasive arguments come from the damndest sources, sometimes – and who cares the source, so long as it works?

> *Originally posted by **[MyTie](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6575081):***
> This isn’t just my side vs your side. This is my side vs your racist side, which is a parody of what you are talking about. This is a caricature of what the real issues are, to the point of being ridiculous.
Side? Look, I don’t know when you say “your racist side” whether you mean me personally or the proverbial you, but I don’t really have a racist side. If someone likes or doesn’t like Obamacare, I really don’t care one way or the other. I’m probably one of the least racist people out there—I dislike racism no matter which direction it comes from (black to white or white to black). So don’t go there.
> *Originally posted by **[vikaTae](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6575747):***
>
> Agreed. If we can force ourselves to look past whatever ideology we think the person might have, and actually address their argument, things go a whole lot better.
>
> The most pervasive arguments come from the damndest sources, sometimes – and who cares the source, so long as it works?
^ This. I think that works.

> *Originally posted by **[Twilight\_Ninja](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6576016):***
> > *Originally posted by **[MyTie](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6575081):***
> > This isn’t just my side vs your side. This is my side vs your racist side, which is a parody of what you are talking about. This is a caricature of what the real issues are, to the point of being ridiculous.
>
> Side? Look, I don’t know when you say “your racist side” whether you mean me personally or the proverbial you, but I don’t really have a racist side. If someone likes or doesn’t like Obamacare, I really don’t care one way or the other. I’m probably one of the least racist people out there—I dislike racism no matter which direction it comes from (black to white or white to black). So don’t go there.
Allow me to reword:
I was talking about the liberal vs conservative ideals. So many people say “my side vs your side”, and speaking like that is partisan. I can tell that you don’t feel that is the best way to go about things. However, the issue I’m speaking about is more sinister than simple partisan politics. The issue is when people say “my side vs your racist side”. My issue is with people who accuse anyone who disagrees with them of racism. The only reason this is even a big deal is because it is national players doing it.
Is that clearer?
> *Originally posted by **[OmegaDoom](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6576175):***
> > far be it for you
>
> from\*
> and before you accuse me of being a grammar nazi, let me remind you of Godwin’s Law ;)
Probably a typo.

> *Originally posted by **[MyTie](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6576465):***
> My issue is with people who accuse anyone who disagrees with them of racism.
Yeah, I agree, that is annoying. I would take it one step further and say I dislike anyone who accuses another of \_\_\_\_\_ just for disagreeing with them. It could be a partisan slug, or racism, or idiocy, or whatever. It’s all just a way to label people, and it’s not fair fighting.

So, going back to the OP:
I agree that race baiting is stupid, and does nothing to promote diplomacy and dialogue.
It’s the kind of mindless labeling and dehumanization of opponents that has wrecked discourse in this country lately.
That being said…
MSNBC is the left wing FOX: infotainment at it’s worst.
Holding that up as an example of “liberal bias in journalism” is just kind of pointless.
Like FOX on the right, they’re pretty unabashed about their leanings. To paint the entire liberal side of the aisle with one brush, based on MSNBC, is pretty far-reaching.
Further, backing up that assertion with a slew of right-leaning sources is equally pointless.
I think as far as sources go, _none_ of those provided in the first post are really journalism. MSNBC included.
Next, why is it that a lot of the threads started from the Right seem to include an attack on “liberals” in the title?
Granted, I find hardcore _anything_ to be stupid and tiresome, and I’ll call you on it without a doubt…but a discussion topic should probably refrain from an outright and immediate ad hominem.
Finally, to the topic of Susan Rice;
I think CNN’s Soledad O’Brien nailed the issue down pretty well.
[O’Brien vs. Heck](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93MtwI-xEpY)
There’s a lot of hypocrisy here, and it’s starting to smack of a witch hunt.
Again, diplomacy and dialogue suffer when things get petty and stupid.

The US political right has been the party of race hate for so long that, at times, the left’s trigger finger may be a little sensitive. However, it’s so sensitive with good reason, the racist portions of the US right have spent a fair amount of effort on cleaning up their language and trying to whitewash their rhetoric to avoid the appearance of racism, while still doing all they can do promote their racial agenda. They’re not always very good at the whitewashing, but they try damn hard.
If you want to end the “race baiting”, as you call it, do some house clearing on your side.

> *Originally posted by **[Redem](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6583656):***If you want to end the “race baiting”, as you call it, do some house clearing on your side.
I’m not going to give you a complete education on American History. I’m just going to give you a glance at it, because it appears you’ve never read history. Conservatives and Republicans have consistently been against racism. Republicans fought for the end to slavery. Republicans voted for Blacks to have the right to vote, with Democrats voting against. The difference is, Dems have become the party of handouts to minorities. But, the Democrats, and liberals, are the party with the history of racism.
You’ve fallen victim to one of the silliest historical misconceptions of all time. Democrats and liberals have opposed equality for blacks for decades, and now are suddenly the group that comes to the rescue to save them from conservatives? How do people even buy this crap. Read this article by Coulter: [http://www.humanevents.com/2012/09/26/coulter-liberals-cant-break-200-year-racism-habit/](http://www.humanevents.com/2012/09/26/coulter-liberals-cant-break-200-year-racism-habit/)

> *Originally posted by **[MyTie](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6583700):***
> > *Originally posted by **[Redem](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6583656):***If you want to end the “race baiting”, as you call it, do some house clearing on your side.
>
> I’m not going to give you a complete education on American History. I’m just going to give you a glance at it, because it appears you’ve never read history. Conservatives and Republicans have consistently been against racism. Republicans fought for the end to slavery. Republicans voted for Blacks to have the right to vote, with Democrats voting against. The difference is, Dems have become the party of handouts to minorities. But, the Democrats, and liberals, are the party with the history of racism.
>
> You’ve fallen victim to one of the silliest historical misconceptions of all time. Democrats and liberals have opposed equality for blacks for decades, and now are suddenly the group that comes to the rescue to save them from conservatives? How do people even buy this crap. Read this article by Coulter: [http://www.humanevents.com/2012/09/26/coulter-liberals-cant-break-200-year-racism-habit/](http://www.humanevents.com/2012/09/26/coulter-liberals-cant-break-200-year-racism-habit/)
\>pretends to be expert on American history
\>thinks the republican party of 1850 is the same as the one of today
\>thinks the modern republican party isnt racist.
Bro, you do know that political parties have changed right?
As in, the Republican and Democrat parties have switched sides. The republicans of the 1850s were liberal, while the democrats of the time were conservative.
You see, you are focusing on political parties based on their names instead of their ideologies.
Also, the republican party is racist. If you need proof, look at the recent election. Romney lost because republicans keep on scaring away minority voters by being racist.
Your source sucks too because it keeps saying that liberals are racist, even though racism goes against the liberal ideology.

> *Originally posted by **[CROWcialism](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6583816):***
>
> As in, the Republican and Democrat parties have switched sides. The republicans of the 1850s were liberal, while the democrats of the time were conservative.
I was wondering when that was going to be mentioned.

Both sides were blameworthy. The Jim Crow laws began to be enacted by Democrats in the southern states, but while Republican presidents were in office. The Civil Rights Act was JFK’s brainchild, but was pushed through by Lyndon Johnson, another Democrat. The worldwide televising of the Selma march shamed the American Congress into passing the act, and without the power of television it probably wouldn’t have happened so soon. Tricky Dicky, a Republican, did his best to turn the clock back, but was ultimately thwarted. So not too many brownie points earned by either side on that issue.

@CROW and tenco – why not read the link? I’m talking about the last 50 years. Read the actual material before thinking I’m limiting my critique to the 1800s. Do I really have to hold your hands?
@beauval – That’s a cop out. Both sides are to blame, to an extent. There will always be racist liberals, and racist conservatives. But, we are talking about problems endemic to the majority. The majority of liberals have historically opposed equal rights for blacks, all the way till the late 70s, when it was no longer vogue to be racist. AT THAT POINT, they became the party protecting the blacks from the evil conservatives that want to “PUT YALL BACK IN CHAINS” (Joe Dumbass Biden).

NOTE: While the topic is primarily about racism and who is applying it in what manner,,,I'm going to shed some light on how a lot of the "inaccuracies" just might be coming about.
Since MyTie started this thread and it is his opinion and how it is formed that is "on the block",,,I'm going to rebut his statement below and show just how twisted reality can become when SOMEONE (likely?) has a very nurtured bias. Note: I DID NOT even come close to inferring that it is MyTie who has this bias. I'm merely going to show how inaccurate his understanding on a few issues involving me is. I do say that when one begins w/ faulty information//understanding....they very likely WILL go far astray of the reality of it all.
> *Originally posted by **[MyTie](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6575040):***
> **Karma directly said** the other day, on the healthcare thread, that I oppose it because I hate poor people, and I’m “not allowed” to hate blacks and gays anymore.
Now, here is the post of mine he is referencing:> *Originally posted by **[karmakoolkid](/forums/9/topics/310008?page=1#posts-6553005):***
>
> Ya know, MyTie….
>
“they” say the same fucking bullshit nonsense when the **MINIMUM** wage is raised.
>
A hard kick in the nutsack to all those who piss, whine, moan, wail, sob about SHARING this country’s great wealth (wealth, by the way, that also IS CREATED BY the working poor) w/ those who have no REAL, SENISBLE health care.
>
> All this crap about Obamacare is just the new bigotry.
>
Ya can’t hate niggers,,,,
>
ya can’t hate faggots,,,
>
ya can’t hate Jews,,,
>
ya can’t hate Pollocks,,,
>
> SO, let’s hate those fucking POOR PEOPLE who ought to be pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps. YEAH. They are the cause of all the problems in America. Let’s blame them.
>
> Sound familiar?
It's rather obvious how he "allows" himself to stretch my generic critique of social ideology into being directly aimed at HIM. Perhaps he does this when hearing other opinions expressed? We all hear w/ our ears/eyes. BUT, those words get filtered via our brains....which have build-in biases, prejudices, "leanings", ideologies, etc.
Okay, for the moment--just so MyTie understands the change-up here--I'm done w/ HIM specifically and am going to address how ppl streeeetch reality to fit their need for it to appear.
I seriously doubt anyone hear hasn't heard the phrase: S/he hears what they wanna hear.
Well, they not only hear it that way....they then proceed to process it via their desire for a truth that is the one they want.
I'm talking about a total reversal of the scientific method. These ppl formulate an opinion and then look for only, listen to only, accept (as being right) only, process to a point that only WILL FIT WHAT THEY ARE LOOKING FOR.
I see one of the reasons for this,,albeit a (probably?) very minor one,,is just plain laziness. We make a "mental rut" of an ideology that is like an old pair of shoes....comfortable and smelly and "not-so-up-2-date". We don't care to do much about the level of information we currently have on an issue....we're quite content to go w/ what we knew a decade ago. We're "good" w/ the very topical, superficial murmurings w/ catch from day-2-day.
Even those who ardently strive to keep abreast of our constantly changing fast-paced social//financial issue can't do it well even if they apply themselves FULL TIME to the endeavor. AND, I'm saying that the information that they will gather will be not of their own personal discovery. It will come from sources that have their own biases and capabilities to sufficiently "see" what they are reporting on. AND, often...even those sources are getting their info second hand.
Now, back to MyTie.
In the Obamacare thread, he made this post:
> *Originally posted by **[MyTie](/forums/9/topics/310008?page=5#posts-6568085):***
>
> My last two posts were removed by admins. I called karma out for insulting people. Those posts were removed, but his posts, which are actually insulting remain. He can keep stuff up like “joe and sally dumbass” and saying “you aren’t able to grasp”, and just calling people ignorant. People who are like “what do you mean, karma”, and he calls them names, and then I’m like “you shouldn’t call people names” and then my posts get deleted. What the fuck!
>
> Karma, knock it off, third time. I’ll keep telling you, over and over, to stop insulting people for not understanding your brand of pseudo English. Admins, you are wrong for deleting my posts, when they are not themselves insulting, especially when you let the actually insulting posts stand.
From MY perspective, MyTie (and jake-o) just doesn't see the difference between attacking the person and attacking their opinion. If he isn't able to see THIS, then what else might be similarly skewed? Well, duh....it is MY "opinion" that his observation about how "greatly" the "libs" are "race-bating" is derived by the various machinations I've described above.
Here we have an individual that rants about the "obvious injustice" he is "suffereing" at the hands of Kong Admin because they--as hosts of this forum and the ones who establish the GUIDELINES--see his method of discussion as NOT BEING WITHIN those guidelines.
On the happenstance that my "inapporpriate" posts were allowed to stand merely because they weren't getting flagged,,,,I asked a member of Kong Admin about this situation that MyTie & jake-o are constantly whining about (their posts being removed). I was told: \_your posts are alright".
I also find interesting that MyTie then takes HIS OWN ANALYSIS of this judgement of posting w/in the guidelines (both his & mine) and uses it as a base to tell me: \_"Karma, knock it off, third time."\_ Should I see this as some form of "censorship-because-you-disagree-with-me"? It smacks of the ol': if ya don't like (what's going on in) America...then leave.
Another area that contributes to poor communication between ppl isn't so much involved w/ their skills as it is w/ the "machinery-of-words". We all know how difficult it is to accurrately & effectively communicate on this forum via ONLY the printed word. One small example is shown by Ninja when she says:
> *Originally posted by **[Twilight\_Ninja](/forums/9/topics/311294?page=1#posts-6576016):***
> Look, I don’t know when you say “your racist side” whether you mean me personally or the proverbial you,...
This is why I try to stay away from that "proverbial (generic?) you" and use another pronoun. If I'm referencing the poster that I have quoted....I will use caps (YOU & YOUR) to differentiate from you & your. At least she asked for clarification. How many don't and end up going w/ the wrong position? MyTie certainly does....even when he knows to look for MY all caps "YOU" should I be talking TO him.
I believe (esp. the way things currently are) if ppl would do a little less "leaning into" via their bieases what they are hearing....they might discover that the "opposition" aren't as nearly "scary-wrong" as we'd like to think they are.
This is what I see about this "race-bating",,,"playing-the-race-care",,,"reverse-racism"...blah, blah. Yes, racism is alive & well. Who has it and what is "feeding it"? When ya get to the truth of the matter....give me a call.
Until then, all we have is a collections of GENERALITIES.
And, just like the old saying: Where theres' smoke...there's probably a fire.
Well, a whole lot of ppl--NOT just lefties--who are moderate GOPers do see a particular "flavor" of racial bias in the far-right conservative agenda. AND, if ya ask those ppl....what ya'll likely get as a response: Hell, I'm not a racist...some of my best friends are niggers.

> Conservatives and Republicans have consistently been against racism. Republicans fought for the end to slavery. Republicans voted for Blacks to have the right to vote, with Democrats voting against. The difference is, Dems have become the party of handouts to minorities. But, the Democrats, and liberals, are the party with the history of racism.
Simply untrue, if you ignore everything but the name. Conservatives are the ones that opposed and continue to oppose racial equality legislation and social changes, right back until the time they fought a war to maintain slavery. They’ve spent a lot of effort on trying to sound less racist but haven’t changed their goals significantly.
Back when the republican party was the liberal party, they opposed slavery, but then they chose to appeal more towards conservatives and began their march to the right and opposed racial equality.
Coulter is not worth reading on any subject, so no thanks.

Redem is spot on.
ANYONE w/ 23 brain cells and their working collectively in order to have any cognitive capability is able to see & grasp this very obvious truth.
It is those w/ such bias to “liberal” agendas of rooting out the last vestiges of racism that try to deny racism even yet exists in America. This is what Ann Coulter’s latest book is about. She insists that racism no long exists.
Well, she is partly right.
Racism on the level of the 50’s (grew up w/ them being very obvious…the word “nigger” was well used) no longer exists. BUT, much of the bias simply went “underground” and overt actions against blacks became taboo….mostly because of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (the year I graduated from high school).
MyTie’s feeble, yet highly strongly conservative, attempt to paint the “liberal agenda” to continue the intent of the CRA of ’64 as a “playing of the race card” is utterly ridiculous. Of course there are those fucking “bleeding heart” liberals that can be pointed to as being overly “the-wolf-is-at-the-door” when discussing racism in America….specifically blaming ONLY the conservative element of society.
It is the many on the “conservative side” of the debate who insist that half-black Obama wouldn’t have been elected were he white. NOW, if THAT isn’t racism & playing a race card…I don’t know what is. Maybe, just maybe, a hugely strong majority of Blacks voted FOR Obama because they were actually voting AGAINST the many policies of the GOP…maybe partially because of their “racial flavor” being merely one of them.
Maybe, just maybe, it is the idiotic position (MyTie…I’m insulting YOUR opinion, NOT YOU) using of historical use of political party identification as some kind of proof that Democrats & liberals are racist…yet, in some oddly skewed manner, will “play the race card” seemingly because they use it to skewer the GOP radical conservatives,,,esp. their NON-RACIAL programs of equality for those who are different than they.